Originally Posted by
Racing Dan
No its not "exactly" the same. Not even close. Sure some tyres might be tight, but normal clincher tyres with tubes are much more tolerant to less than ideal fit. If anything the issues with clincher are to a large degree created by wheel and tyre companies, trying to bridge the gap between tubeless and clincher, making halfway products marketed as "tubeless ready", "two way fit" ect, creating problems for everybody, not just the tubeless crowd, in the process. Look, I have nothing against tubless, but the current situation is a train wreck.
I think it is exactly the same in the sense that some clincher tires/rims mount with difficulty, some with ease, and some tubeless tires/rims mount with difficulty, some with ease. There is no difference in that regard.
You talk about “tolerance” of less than ideal fit, and yes of course that is true because the tubeless tire has to do more precise work than a tubed clincher tire. I don’t agree with you that the inconsistency of clincher fitment is due to the manufacturers bridging the gap between the formats; I’ve been road cycling since the mid-‘80s, way before tubeless was around, and the problem of hard to mount clinchers has been around since then.
I also wouldn’t characterize the situation as “a train wreck,” because while the tubeless format presents challenges distinct from tubed clinchers, it still works. I’d venture to say that it’s virtually impossible to buy a tubeless rim/tire combo which does not work. Sure, some will be hard to mount, some will require sealant to hold air, but once they’re set up, they work.
Tubeless is definitely not at the idiot-proof stage yet— though I think Road UST is the pathway there— and it takes time, effort, understanding, and maybe some luck, in order to get the perfect tire/wheel combo for anyone’s given needs. If those needs include not investing time, effort, or understanding (a.k.a. a learning curve), then be well-advised to steer clear of tubeless...or any tire format you’re unfamiliar with, like probably tubular.